Appeal No. 2006-2493 Page 12
Application No. 10/126,122
According to appellants (Brief, page 2), van Breeman fails to teach a mass
encoded library. The examiner does not dispute this assertion. Appellants’
arguments, as well as, the examiner’s response focuses on the Carell reference
as set forth in the previous ground of rejection.
There is no dispute that van Breeman fails to teach a mass-coded library
as is required by appellants’ claimed invention. For the same reasons as set
forth above, we find that Carell fails to make up for the deficiencies in van
Breeman. Accordingly, we reverse the rejection of claims 1, 2, 5, 6, 8, 9 and 11
under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of van
Breeman and Carell.
REVERSED
)
Donald E. Adams )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
) BOARD OF PATENT
)
Demetra J. Mills ) APPEALS AND
Administrative Patent Judge )
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
Lora M. Green )
Administrative Patent Judge )
DA/dym
FISH&RICHARDSON PC
P.O.BOX1022
MINNEAPOLIS MN 55440-1022
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007